August 30, 2003


A number of US troops, thankfully small, were killed in the initial liberation of Iraq. A slightly greater number have been killed since, although, overall, the list of casualties remains lower than many expected. The Sydney Morning Herald’s Alan Ramsey thinks everybody should be shouting and screaming:

Australian political life reacted in silence this week as US military deaths in Iraq reached a melancholy milestone. On Tuesday morning a homemade bomb killed an American soldier north of Baghdad and wounded two others. His death, reported The New York Times, meant more US troops had now died keeping "the peace" in Iraq than had died fighting "the war" ... I'm not aware a politician anywhere, state or federal, had anything to say about the significance of Tuesday's death. Most newspapers ignored it, too.

Old Alan’s main point, however, is the influence of those damn Heebs:

The only movement anywhere in the debate on Middle East policy is what Crean has been doing lately to try to mollify the influential (and wealthy) pro-Israeli lobby in Sydney and Melbourne. You don't know about that?

No, I don’t. Possibly because of the Zionist conspiracy to silence everything!

On Sunday night, at Melbourne's Werdiger Family Hall, Crean is due to speak "to the Jewish community" at a meeting organised by the Australia/Israel and Jewish Affairs Council (AIJAC), the State Zionist Council of Victoria and the Jewish Community Council of Victoria, according to the weekly Australian Jewish News. The subject of Crean's address has been publicised as, "Israel's search for peace in the Middle East". (One Labor wit remarked that if this was truly the speech topic, then it would be a very brief speech.)

Har-de-har-har. Ramsey claims that any pro-Israeli sentiment from the Labor leader is money-driven:

Almost always, in politics, money is at the root of the greatest grovelling.

And we all know that the Jews have all the money. Crean has a few Palestinianoids in his party; Ramsey writes that shutting them up endangers Labor’s “even handed” policy, and concludes:

The pro-Israeli lobby in this country is a powerful, influential and intimidating group. Backbenchers such as Julia Irwin and Leo McLeay get left way behind, along with the interests of the Palestinians.

This is in a mainstream newspaper, by the way. Not Indymedia.

Posted by Tim Blair at August 30, 2003 04:08 AM

Yes, the US has lost some soldiers since the liberation of Iraq, and I grieve for them all...but these are the fortunes of war.

However, lets look at the activities of the Religion of Peace in the past WEEK. 20+ dead in on a Jerusalem bus..20+ dead at the UN bombing..40+ dead in Bombay... and 75 and counting today at a mosque in Iraq...If this death toll doesn't equal the deaths of our soldiers post liberation, it is pretty damn close.
We ignore these assholes at OUR peril.

Ramseys other comment about the pro Israel lobby are beneath contempt and not worth your bandwidth, Tim..

Posted by: debbie at August 30, 2003 at 04:26 AM

Why is it a "milestone" that as many US soldiers have died since the arbitrary declaration of the end of major combat as died before that declaration?

This is just a trumped up excuse to harp on what are really very low casualties, in an attempt to drain popular support for the war (which will lead, incidentally, to victory for the Islamonutters. Not that that matters much when weighed against the chance to land a blow on the eeeevil Bushitler).

Posted by: R.C. Dean at August 30, 2003 at 04:54 AM

The comments above are on the money. If we harp on a count of our losses, we are doomed. The force we fight is a death cult which regards death as a reward. They will always outnumber us in a death count. The left and the pacifists would lead us into a future so bleak that it is beyond comprehension.

The event today in Iraq is a typical example of an Arab/Moslem election. Regime change has historically taken place in this manner. Force and death and intimidation are the party platforms of the Middle East.

Posted by: Ted at August 30, 2003 at 05:18 AM

So why don't labour go after the Saudis. Look at how many billions they have pumped into Washington. They even got Baker on board.
The usual red herring of "the Jews with their money continue trying to control the world". OOps! Forgot about the cabal in the Pentagon.

Posted by: Barry at August 30, 2003 at 07:14 AM

And, of course, counting a "milestone" means you don't have to report things like "the number of Iraqi citizens raped and killed by Uday and Qusay Hussein since their death remains zero, still the record low in the past 10 years."

Posted by: JorgXMcKie at August 30, 2003 at 10:19 AM

You know what the irony of all this "the US foreign policy is being driven by the Zionists/ Isreal/ZOG" meme is? If American foreign policy in the Middle East was driven solely by the views of its average citizens (& not its elites), it would, if anything be MORE pro-Israel.

Posted by: Sean at August 30, 2003 at 10:25 AM

Can anyone direct me to online details about US casualties in Iraq?

I have a suspicion someone has got their numbers wrong.

I haven't followed it too closely but I thought the casualties where in the region of fifty-sixty quite recently, which is still less than the war, but I may have missed something.

I'd be curious to know- and to see a break down of how the casualties are caused. Some media may be mixing figures- for instance, a death from illness or road accident isn't quite the same issue as enemy action (although it's no less of a tragedy for the guys family).

Posted by: Wilbur at August 30, 2003 at 11:47 AM

Alan Ramsey is way beyond idiotarianism and is a full-blown antisemite.

One difference between him and many anti-American commentators is that Alan supports mandatory detention, probably for the worst of all possible reasons.

Posted by: Andjam at August 30, 2003 at 12:14 PM

The Washington Times reported Thurs., Aug. 28: "While 141 U.S. soldiers have been killed since May 1, just 63 were killed in action; 78 died in nonhostile incidents. Between March 19 — when Mr. Bush first sent in troops — and May 1, 112 U.S. service members were killed in action. Twenty-five died in nonhostile incidents in that period."

Another soldier was killed today.

The death toll from Najaf has reached 125 (according to the CNN website.)

We grieve for all these deaths, but were prepared before the war that it would be a hard won peace, and anyone who denies it just wasn't listening.

Posted by: Debbye at August 30, 2003 at 12:20 PM

Hundreds of thousands of troops are in Iraq. How many would have died in a comparible period if they were at home?

Posted by: Andjam at August 30, 2003 at 01:58 PM

I find it a little odd that EVERY country manages to have a massive (and universally wealthy) Jewish conspiracy running the goverment and media when they suddenly need one. Pretty soon, China will blame on and accuse them of planning Tiananmen.

Posted by: Aaron at August 30, 2003 at 01:59 PM

You can read the joke the Jews and the Bicycle riders here. The sad thing is that the far left regard "The Jews and the SUV-riders" as an accurate summary of who is to blame for America's foreign policy.

Posted by: Andjam at August 30, 2003 at 02:03 PM

McLey and Irwin have seats that have large arab populations.

Maybe Crean is grovelling to keep Jewish funds, what pollie doesn't, but no more than McLey and his mates are grovelling to keep their ethnic arab electorate on side.

This I think is called politics.

No conspiracy to find.

Posted by: Gilly at August 30, 2003 at 04:10 PM

Debbye- good research!

As I suspected, someone is fiddling the figures, mixing accidents with casualties from enemy fire. Interesting.

Posted by: Wilbur at August 30, 2003 at 07:48 PM

Hey, as long as we're making up milestones, how about "US combat deaths exceed those inflicted by Vichy French in North Africa?"

I think that was around 530.

Posted by: John Nowak at August 30, 2003 at 09:10 PM

If "Bush=Hitler," how is his administration run by a "cabal" of Zionists?

Oh, yeah..."Hitler's" victims=Jew-hating murderers, er, "activists."

Wait...I'm still confused.

Posted by: Sean M. at August 30, 2003 at 11:05 PM

Wilbur, Andjam: There were several prominent left wing blogs absolutely livid over the " deception " in the U.S. media whenever an outlet would cite only the figure dealing with combat deaths. These assholes betray their desperation to create a quagmire. As points out, the US military averages better than one death per day every year from non-combat causes (aircraft and road accidents, other training accidents, suicides, etc.) Given that a third of the US military is currently in Iraq, the non-combat death toll since May 1st, while tragic, is in proportion to what would occur during peacetime.

It should be obvious to us all, the leftist extremists who are trying to discredit the U.S. at every turn in Iraq, silently cheer the death of every coalition soldier. Truly diseased minds.

Posted by: Mike at August 30, 2003 at 11:48 PM

Wilbur, when I was in the Naval Air Reserves, back in the Sixties, I was told in my Deck Safety Course, that they averaged 5 deaths for every six month aircraft carrier cruise. This is out of a crew of between 3000 to 4000 men. Usually, these were pilots and aircrew, but also included blown overboard by jet blast, sucked into jet intakes, walked through propellor arc, etc.. The deck of an aircraft carrier is not your friend. I can't imagine that living and working in close proximity to Hummvees, Bradleys, and M1s is much friendlier. Hell, during the recent festivities in the Gulf, one guy fell off a carrier trying to chase down a football that had got out of hand. He was not recovered.

Posted by: CGeib at August 31, 2003 at 03:59 AM

Mike & CGeib... I know what you mean.

Out of a group of 150,000 troops, accidents will happen. It's interesting that they are being given the same political 'currency' as combat deaths!

I didn't realise the accident rates on carriers was so bad. I'm glad I'm a land-lubber. Actually, dad is ex-brit merchant navy, and can recount a few old sailors tales of guys lost at sea and killed in bizarre accidents.

Posted by: Wilbur at August 31, 2003 at 09:45 AM

Let us not forget (as the odor of slightly overcooked anciens wafts through the Parisian evening air)that those defenders of peace at any price (including surrender) have managed to finish off more of their own citizens through simple neglect than have been killed by terrorists in the past five years.

If you wish to know true fear, vote socialist.

The Anglosphere will see it through in Iraq. I have no idea if democracy can flourish in a land that has never known it but I know we're not leaving until it's been given a good try.

Posted by: RDB at August 31, 2003 at 05:36 PM

Debbye, Sean, Anmdjam, Wilbur, deaths ain't everything, there are casualties too. You don't get casualties in peacetime and currently they run at about ten personnel per day in Iraq. Casualties means wounded. The new body armour worn by CPA troops is very effective at reducing wounds to all but the 'extremities, ie limbs.

The problem is that an RPG is 84mm of high explosive which effectively severs limds in a way the bullets do not. A horrific number of casualties are therefore joining the ranks of limbless ex-servicemen. That's a great price for families and the communities to bear. You're better off dead if you loose both legs.

Check out the Washington Post for US inbound flights in C17's to US Army hospitals. They're packed.

Posted by: britvet at September 8, 2003 at 07:34 AM